Richardson X-Ray, Inc., Rancho Dominerey, California, Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalties

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 15000004, License No. 0373-70 (CA), EA 93-201]

Richardson X-Ray, Inc., Rancho Dominerey, California, Order

Imposing Civil Monetary Penalties

I

Richardson X-Ray, Inc. (Licensee or Richardson) is the holder of

Byproduct Material License No. 0373-70 issued by the State of

California. The license authorizes the Licensee to possess and use

sealed sources in industrial radiographic exposure devices within the

State of California. Pursuant to 10 CFR 150.20 and Richardson's

California license, Richardson is authorized to possess and use

licensed byproduct materials to perform industrial radiography in Non-

Agreement States and areas under exclusive Federal jurisdiction.

II

An inspection by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was

conducted on July 29 and 30, 1993, of the Licensee's activities that

were performed in an area of exclusive Federal jurisdiction at

Vandenburg Air Force Base, California. The results of the inspection

determined that the Licensee had not conducted its activities in full

compliance with NRC requirements. A written Notice of Violation and

Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties (Notice) was served upon the

Licensee by letter dated November 5, 1993. The Notice states the nature

of the violations, the provisions of the NRC's requirements that the

Licensee had violated, and the amount of the civil penalties proposed

for the violations. The Licensee responded to the Notice in a letter

dated November 30, 1993. In its response, the Licensee admitted the

violations assessed civil penalties, but requested that the proposed

civil penalties be remitted based on its corrective actions and its

alleged inability to pay the proposed $25,000 civil penalty.

III

After consideration of the Licensee's response and the statements

of fact, explanation, and argument for remission contained therein, the

NRC staff has determined, as set forth in the Appendix to this Order,

that the Licensee's timely and extensive corrective actions support a

$5,000 reduction of the $25,000 civil penalties proposed in the

November 5, 1993 Notice, based on mitigation consistent with the

Enforcement Policy.

IV

In view of the foregoing, and pursuant to section 234 of the Atomic

Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act), 42 U.S.C. 2282, and 10 CFR 2.205,

it is hereby ordered that:

The Licensee pay civil penalties in the full amount of Twenty

Thousand Dollars ($20,000) by check, draft, or money order, payable to

the Treasurer of the United States and mailed to the Director, Office

of Enforcement, USNRC, Washington, DC 20555. This payment shall be made

within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order or in accordance with

the attached Promissory Note for Payment of the Civil Penalties (Note).

If payment is to be in accordance with the attached Note, the Licensee

within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order shall submit the

signed Note in duplicate to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail stop 7H5, Washington, DC 20555.

V

The Licensee may request a hearing within 30 days of the date of

this Order. A request for a hearing should be clearly marked as a

``Request for an Enforcement Hearing'' and shall be addressed to the

Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555. Copies also shall be

sent to the Assistant General Counsel for Hearings and Enforcement at

the same address and to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region IV, 611

Ryan Plaza Drive, suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011.

If a hearing is requested, the Commission will issue an Order

designating the time and place of the hearing. If the Licensee fails to

request a hearing within 30 days of the date of this Order, the

provisions of this Order shall be effective without further

proceedings. If payment has not been made by that time, the matter may

be referred to the Attorney General for collection.

In the event the Licensee requests a hearing as provided above, the

issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether, on the basis

of the violations admitted by the Licensee, this Order should be

sustained.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 13th day of May 1994.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

James Lieberman,

Director, Office of Enforcement.

Appendix--Evaluation and Conclusion

On November 5, 1993, a Notice of Violation and Proposed

Imposition of Civil Penalties (Notice) was issued to Richardson X-

Ray, Inc. (Licensee) for violations identified during an NRC

inspection conducted on July 29 and 30, 1993. The Licensee responded

to the Notice in a letter, dated November 30, 1993. In its response,

the Licensee admitted the violations but requested remission of the

penalties, based on its corrective actions and its alleged inability

to pay. The NRC's evaluations and conclusion regarding the

Licensee's requests are as follows:

Summary of Licensee's Request for Mitigation

The Licensee admitted the violations, but requested remission of

the proposed civil penalties, in whole or in part, on the following

bases:

1. In response to earlier violations of state radiography

requirements, the State of California had required the Licensee to

obtain the services of a consultant to provide radiation safety

training and perform unannounced job site surveys of each

radiographer. The cost of hiring the consultant was $10,000.

2. Corrective actions taken by the Licensee after the

Enforcement Conference included appointing a new RSO and terminating

the prior RSO, and implementing a disciplinary policy for

radiographic personnel.

3. The imposition of the civil penalties would cause a financial

burden on the licensee to the point of possible forfeiture of its

radioactive materials license.

NRC Evaluation of Licensee's Request for Mitigation

The NRC has evaluated the Licensee's response and has determined

that an adequate basis was not provided for full remission or

reduction of the civil penalties, however mitigation of the civil

penalties is warranted based on the Licensee's corrective actions is

warranted. In particular:

1. Earlier inspections by the NRC and the State of California

had identified similar violations by Licensee personnel during the

two years preceding the July 1993 NRC inspection. For example, in

December 1991 Licensee was cited by the State of California for: (1)

Failure to perform surveys of the radiographic exposure device, (2)

failure to recharge a pocket dosimeter at the beginning of the

shift, and (3) failure to perform quarterly audits of radiographic

personnel.

In April 1992, the Licensee was cited by the State of California

for: (1) Failure to wear personal monitoring devices, (2) failure to

perform surveys of the radiographic exposure device, (3) failure to

post the restricted area and high radiation area, (4) failure to

maintain surveillance of the restricted area to prevent unauthorized

access into the high radiation area, (5) failure to maintain records

of surveys, source usage, and training, and (6) failure to perform

quarterly audits of radiographic personnel.

In May 1992, the State of California held an Enforcement

Conference with the Licensee to discuss the violations identified

during the April 1992 inspection. As a result of the Enforcement

Conference the Licensee was required to hire a consultant to perform

radiation safety training and audits of radiographic personnel. The

Licensee's hiring of a consultant in May 1992 did not prevent

recurrence of the same types of violations in July 1993.

Costs incurred by licensees to ensure compliance and

implementation of their radiation safety programs are not considered

in determining the base civil penalty, nor in escalating or

mitigating the civil penalty.

2. The Licensee cites additional corrective actions in its

response that include appointing a new RSO, terminating the prior

RSO and implementing a disciplinary policy for radiographic

personnel. The NRC recognizes that the Licensee took immediate

corrective actions following the inspector's identification of the

violations which included retraining of all radiographers and

assistant radiographers, monitoring with regular unannounced job

site audits, ensuring radiographers have the needed equipment prior

to leaving for the job and ensuring that the radiographers are

trained on all equipment.

The November 5, 1993, Notice stated that based on the

repetitiveness of the violations, the Licensee's 1992 corrective

actions were inadequate and that additional corrective actions

needed to be considered to prevent further repetition. Given that

the Licensee's more recent corrective actions were timely and

extensive, these actions support a $5,000 reduction of the $25,000

civil penalties proposed in the November 5, 1993 Notice, based on

mitigation consistent with the Enforcement Policy.

3. Based on its review of the financial information provided by

the Licensee, the NRC determined that the Licensee possesses

sufficient financial resources to pay the proposed civil penalties

over a period of time, including interest. Accordingly, a payment

schedule has been developed and is enclosed in the form of a

Promissory Note in Payment of the Civil Penalties (Note). The

Licensee, however, may pay the civil penalties in full, if it so

desires.

In view of the above, the proposed civil penalties should not be

reduced based on the Licensee's alleged inability to pay.

NRC Conclusion

Based on its evaluation of the Licensee's response, the NRC

concludes that the Licensee's timely and extensive corrective

actions support a $5,000 reduction of the $25,000 civil penalties

proposed in the November 5, 1993 Notice.

Notice, based on mitigation consistent with the Enforcement

Policy. Accordingly, civil monetary penalties in the amount of

$20,000 should be imposed.

[FR Doc. 94-12497 Filed 5-20-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-M